ANTI-SHOUTING CASE

New Zealand Times, Volume XLIII, Issue 9902, 22 February 1918, Page 9

ANTI-SHOUTING CASE

ROYAL OAK APPEAL DISMISSED. In the Supremo Court yesterday His Honour flic Chief Justice (Sir Robert Stout) gave big decision in respect to tbe general appeal against tbe decision of Mr S- K. McCarthy, S.M., when ho convicted James O Haulou, head barman of tho Royal Oak Hotel, on a breach of the anti-shouting regulations. At the hearing of tho case last week Mr O. P. Skorrett, K.C., called evidence to support kis submission that tho identity of O’Hanlon had been mistaken by the two constables who had decocted tho breach. For tho Crown, Mr P. S. K. Macassey held .that o'Hanlon’s identity had been positively proved. In his judgment His Honour said it was imxjossible for any sensible man to have mistaken the identity of o’Hanlon from tho other men in tho bar. Rodonski, tk e barman who, it was suggested, had been mistaken for O’Hanlou, was very different in appearance from O’Hanlon. Rodonski had said that he did not take tho 2s proffered by one of the constables; therefore, ’to find that Rodonski was the man who had really committed the breach would bo to find him guilty of perjury. His Honour could not find the magistrate was wrong In his decision, unless the evidence showed it. This it did not. O’Hanlon Jmd riot discharged the burden placed on him by the court to show ho was the wrong man charged. The appeal must bo dismissed, with coats £7 7s.